VaNiL
0
THE MICHAEL JACKSON CASE: Previous accuser contacted to testify
Authorities also reach witnesses in 1993 investigation
11/19/04
By DAWN HOBBS
NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER
Santa Barbara authorities have contacted the alleged victim and witnesses from a decade-old child molestation case against Michael Jackson about testifying in the entertainer's upcoming trial, the News-Press has learned.
The accuser from the 1993 case, now in his early 20s, told authorities he would take the stand only if his testimony was necessary to convict Mr. Jackson, sources close to the case said.
The earlier investigation crumbled when the boy, who was 13 at the time, refused to testify after his family accepted a multimillion-dollar settlement from Mr. Jackson to end a civil lawsuit.
It's not a surprise that prosecutors would attempt to link the two cases. They want to call the alleged victim and witnesses from the 1993 case -- including former employees of the Neverland Valley Ranch -- to testify in the current case to establish a pattern in Mr. Jackson's behavior, the sources said. That would lend weight to the testimony of the current accuser.
Authorities also contacted the alleged victim from 1993 to testify before the grand jury for the current case in April. A family friend told the News-Press then that he indicated he'd prefer to testify only once, at trial. The current accuser, however, did appear before the grand jury and testified that Mr. Jackson gave him alcohol and then molested him on four occasions between February and March 2003, according to court documents.
It's up to Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville to decide if the 1993 evidence will be allowed at the upcoming trial, scheduled to begin Jan. 31 with jury selection. Mr. Jackson pleaded not guilty in April to child molestation and conspiracy charges.
In response to their formal request, the Jackson defense lawyers recently received from the prosecution thousands of documents and hundreds of photographs from the 1993 investigation.
If the older evidence is admitted, the defense team, led by Thomas Mesereau, would likely argue that it is proof Mr. Jackson is an easy mark for extortion. The defense has repeatedly said the allegations in the current case surfaced from a failed attempt by the accuser's mother to get money from Mr. Jackson.
In addition to the $20 million settlement paid to the boy's family in 1993, NBC's "Dateline" reported in September that Mr. Jackson paid more than $2 million to the 12-year-old son of a maid at Neverland who had alleged inappropriate touching. However, when the boy at the center of the investigation refused to cooperate with the prosecution, the maid's son balked at testifying because he didn't want to go it alone, sources said.
In response to publicity about the $2 million settlement, Mr. Mesereau released a statement pointing out that Mr. Jackson had been "repeatedly advised by those who stood to make fortunes in his business affairs to pay money, rather than face certain false allegations. As a result, many years ago, he did pay money, rather than litigate, two false allegations that he had harmed children. . . . Mr. Jackson now regrets making these payments. . . . Mr. Jackson now realizes the advice he received was wrong. He should have fought these charges to the bitter end and vindicated himself."
If 1993 witnesses are allowed to testify, they would likely include Mr. Jackson's security guards, private maids and limousine driver who would attest to alleged activities they saw at the ranch. In depositions and declarations from the old case obtained by the News-Press, one maid reported seeing Mr. Jackson sleep in the same bed with boys and shower with them. Another employee told the News-Press he could corroborate the molestation claim.
However, the defense would likely attack the credibility of the 1993 witnesses because some sold their stories to tabloids.
The mother of the boy who received $2 million stated in a deposition in 1993 that she became concerned when she found her son lying next to Mr. Jackson on a sleeping bag in a darkened room at Neverland. "I got nervous. I told my son to come out, that he needed to eat," the mother said, adding that she found $300 stuffed in her son's pocket. She quit working for Mr. Jackson soon after.
The primary alleged victim in 1993 gave authorities a sworn declaration in December of that year. He described sleeping with Mr. Jackson at Neverland, at his house and at hotels in New York, Florida and Europe. He alleged that contact with Mr. Jackson increased gradually from hugging to brief kisses on the cheek and then open-mouthed kisses. According to the statement, he also claimed that in May 1993 in Monaco, he took a bath with Mr. Jackson and the contact progressed from fondling to masturbation to oral copulation.
Mr. Jackson's legal team during the 1993 case said the story was part of an elaborate extortion plot, but ultimately paid the multimillion-dollar settlement.
RESUMENCILLO
Según las fuentes del periódico Santa Barbara News Press, la fiscalía ha contactado con Jordie para testificar en el juicio. Según sus mismas fuentes (un amigo de la familia), Jordie también fue llamado para testificar en el Gran Jurado, pero se negó alegando que sólo quiere declarar en el juicio si su testimonio sirve para condenar a Michael.
Además de Jordie, ya que la fiscalía quiere meter de lleno el caso del 93 para demostrar un patrón de comportamiento de MJ, también llamarían a ex-guardaespaldas, el ama de llaves y demás; que testificarían en contra de MJ. Aunque la defensa atacaría su credibilidad ya que vendieron sus historias a los tabloides. También hablan del caso Blanca Francia y que MJ le pagó 2 millones de dólares para evitarse otra posible denuncia (sumándose al carro de los Chandler, claro está).
La fiscalía ya le ha dado a la defensa miles de documentos, fotos, transcripciones y demás del caso del 93. Pero de Melville depende aceptar si meter el caso del 93 o no.
Mi opinión personal:
No me creo nada, llevamos leyendo el nombre de Jordie desde hace más de un año y aún no ha asomado por ninguna parte. Las fuentes del periódico, me juego un brazo a que es Ray Chandler, y de esa boca no puede salir nada que sea verdad.
Jordie no testificará, ya tiene su vida montada y no se va a complicar ahora de nuevo. Pero en la posibilidad de que lo haga, habría que ver como defiende su historia delante de un tribunal. Podría ser un golpe descomunal para la defensa o podría ser la posibilidad de limpiar el nombre de Michael para siempre. Aunque repito, dudo muchísimo que Jordie acabe apareciendo por ninguna parte; además... si Sneddon tiene un caso tan fuerte, ¿para que anda llamando a Jordie?
Última edición:
